alert The fund can't be withdrawal from Epik.com via Masterbucks wallet

[enamebroker]

It happened on 23rd Aug 2022 and this matter lasted almost one month without any process. Masterbucks.com declined my fund withdrawal and disabled the button of fund withdrawal. And I contacted Epik.com and got no further action even if Rob Monster got involved in it for two weeks. All the time I was told in email by management review.

What is wrong with Epik.com? Do you think it is normal to disable fund withdrawal? How can I get back my fund from Epik.com? Thanks for your suggestion.

 

[Derek Peterson]

Why hasn't Royce gone after Monster's stolen loot?

Who is the only person Epik's current state benefits?

IMHO Royce is intentionally screwing up Epik for Monster. New CEO was forced by investors/creditors in exchange to not suing. Royce rekts Epik, Monster blames investors/creditors and sues them for decreased value of Epik and gets to keep his stolen money and Royce gets his cut.

 

[bmugford]

Looks like the guy paid for a renewal on 3/31/2023.
24+ days later it still doesn't appear to have been renewed.

It looks like the domain expires in (3) days.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1650454591740182528

 

[bmugford]

I would love more information on this @bhartzer.

I know it was determined that Epik offered insurance products, but did Epik actually sell any policies?

I think it is clear if they did those would need to be refunded as they are not valid, nor were they ever valid to begin with.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1650258416013647875

 

[bhartzer]

I would love more information on this @bhartzer.

I know it was determined that Epik offered insurance products, but did Epik actually sell any policies?

I think it is clear if they did those would need to be refunded as they are not valid, nor were they ever valid to begin with.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1650258416013647875

As I recall, DNProtect made $34 total from selling a 'domain name warranty' (not insurance).

The individual who tweeted that is a habitual scammer and harasser. While the domain name warranty was being offered, he purchased $10/mo and paid for 6 months. He then immediately claimed that DNProtect owed him $300,000 because someone "stole" two domains from him years ago. He never owned those domains, and even if they were 'stolen' from him, the 'domain warranty' started when he paid for the warranty. It's not retroactive.

Imagine if I bought car insurance and immediately made a claim for an accident that occurred 10 years ago. It doesn't work that way. In the case of this scammer, DNProtect refunded his $60 at the time. But if he still claims that DNProtect owes him $300,000 then let him take it up with the current CEO of Epik. I don't have anything to do with DNProtect or Epik anymore.

In regards to the Washington State insurance complaint and fine, there were actually 2 fines, as the max penalty is $25,000. One was for 'posting that Rob Monster was THINKING of starting a domain name insurance service'. The State of Washington literally fined DNProtect, Rob, and Epik because of a Namepros post Rob made. Since when is it illegal to post about something you're 'thinking of doing'? Well apparently you can't do that according to the State of Washington. The second $25,000 fine was because DNProtect offered a 'domain warranty', it was not sold to customers as 'insurance'.

The $50,000 fine was reduced to $10,000 by ME and my attorney, not anyone else. The case was going to trial, and deadlines for discovery, etc. had already passed. RM, Epik, and Brian Royce absolutely refused to get any attorneys involved to represent Epik and DNProtect in the case. So, I hired my own attorney, with my own money, to represent my interests in DNProtect. We negotiated the fine down to $10,000 from $50,000. My attorney and I stepped away from the case (because I was never named personally) when Epik and RM were found guilty when they or their attorney didn't show up for a mandatory status call with the judge. Then suddenly, a few weeks later, we learn of this settlement.

 

[Future Sensors]

 

[bmugford]

As I recall, DNProtect made $34 total from selling a 'domain name warranty' (not insurance).

The individual who tweeted that is a habitual scammer and harasser. While the domain name warranty was being offered, he purchased $10/mo and paid for 6 months. He then immediately claimed that DNProtect owed him $300,000 because someone "stole" two domains from him years ago. He never owned those domains, and even if they were 'stolen' from him, the 'domain warranty' started when he paid for the warranty. It's not retroactive.

Imagine if I bought car insurance and immediately made a claim for an accident that occurred 10 years ago. It doesn't work that way. In the case of this scammer, DNProtect refunded his $60 at the time. But if he still claims that DNProtect owes him $300,000 then let him take it up with the current CEO of Epik. I don't have anything to do with DNProtect or Epik anymore.

Thanks for an explanation on that.

In regards to the Washington State insurance complaint and fine, there were actually 2 fines, as the max penalty is $25,000. One was for 'posting that Rob Monster was THINKING of starting a domain name insurance service'. The State of Washington literally fined DNProtect, Rob, and Epik because of a Namepros post Rob made. Since when is it illegal to post about something you're 'thinking of doing'? Well apparently you can't do that according to the State of Washington. The second $25,000 fine was because DNProtect offered a 'domain warranty', it was not sold to customers as 'insurance'.

The $50,000 fine was reduced to $10,000 by ME and my attorney, not anyone else. The case was going to trial, and deadlines for discovery, etc. had already passed. RM, Epik, and Brian Royce absolutely refused to get any attorneys involved to represent Epik and DNProtect in the case. So, I hired my own attorney, with my own money, to represent my interests in DNProtect. We negotiated the fine down to $10,000 from $50,000. My attorney and I stepped away from the case (because I was never named personally) when Epik and RM were found guilty when they or their attorney didn't show up for a mandatory status call with the judge. Then suddenly, a few weeks later, we learn of this settlement.

The Washington State Office of the Insurance Commissioner already made the findings. Epik agreed to the settlement terms.


The OIC review of the website www.dnprotect.com revealed the following:

DNProtect is described as the Internet’s leading risk management service and offers “Domain Ownership Coverage” protecting the domain from legal, theft, and clerical error loss. The webpage includes a premium calculator for the coverage.

In DNProtect’s policy terms and conditions, they describe a warranty for internet domain names to business and individuals who own those names.

In the sample domain name ownership coverage policy, it describes a “warranty agreement” for “reimbursement of services associated with the recovery or update of ownership of a domain name.”

“DNProtect provides protection for the domain name described in the policy in consideration of the payment of a premium.”

DNProtect offers an affiliate program that pays a commission for each referral that “ends up being protected by our domain name insurance.”

DNP identifies Epik Holdings to be the underwriter for the policy.


There is no real sense in debating the facts of the case.

You can read the ruling. There are multiple citations where the term "insurance" is actually used, or used interchangeably with similar terms.

Brad

 

[Future Sensors]

@bhartzer Care to explain further?

 

[Future Sensors]

(not insurance).

Untrue.

 

[Future Sensors]

it was not sold to customers as 'insurance'.

Untrue.

 

[bhartzer]

@bhartzer Care to explain further?

I don't think there's any more explanation to be done at this point. I'm not going to defend Rob Monster's domain 'warranty/insurance/protection' product that he created (or whatever you want to call it).

Personally, I think the overall concept of "domain insurance" is a good one, and it should be a product that businesses can purchase along with cyber liability insurance. I don't have interest at this time in offering that type of service, though.

 

[Future Sensors]

I don't think there's any more explanation to be done at this point.

You're not the Bill Hartzer from the screenshot?

 

[bmugford]

I don't think there's any more explanation to be done at this point. I'm not going to defend Rob Monster's domain 'warranty/insurance/protection' product that he created (or whatever you want to call it).

Personally, I think the overall concept of "domain insurance" is a good one, and it should be a product that businesses can purchase along with cyber liability insurance. I don't have interest at this time in offering that type of service, though.

https://www.billhartzer.com/domain-names/google-loses-blogspot-in-domain-name/

It is literally on your own website. The word "insurance" is there (5) times.

 

[bmugford]

Personally, I think the overall concept of "domain insurance" is a good one, and it should be a product that businesses can purchase along with cyber liability insurance. I don't have interest at this time in offering that type of service, though.

It might be a good one, if you are properly licensed to offer it...and the underwriter was not some broke company rife with corporate abuse.

These things are regulated for a reason.

Brad

 

[bhartzer]

Untrue.

"It was sold not sold as insurance..."

All I'm going to say is that when someone went to the DNProtect website and purchased the "protection" offered, a warranty document was created automatically in PDF format. We could go back and forth over and over again on warranty/insurance. But I think you know the difference between a 'home warranty' and 'home insurance'.


You could go back to Archive.org and look at the site and see the warranty that was actually sold. Oh wait...

 

[Future Sensors]

@bhartzer It's still on your site, as pointed out above. You were part of this and you can no longer deny it.

 

[bhartzer]

https://www.billhartzer.com/domain-names/google-loses-blogspot-in-domain-name/

It is literally on your own website. The word "insurance" is there (5) times.

Show attachment 236394

LOL yeah, that's a post from 2020, before the DNProtect website was even fully launched and someone could actually purchase something on it. I was linking out to DNProtect pretty heavily back then and getting links to the site.

 

[Future Sensors]

 

[bhartzer]

@bhartzer It's still on your site, as pointed out above. You were part of this and you can no longer deny it.

"It's still on your site, as pointed out above."
Yeah, I don't go back and edit old blog posts. I have over 1,000 blog posts.

I personally wrote all of the copy for the DNProtect website, did all social media, all sales, all technical support, and all of the stolen domain name recoveries (recovered over 500 stolen domains). Domain name protection/warranty/whatever was one service offered of several. It was an utter complete failure (that service was a failure). I don't deny anything.

DNProtect as a company was profitable, and I co-founded it with Rob Monster. Epik, Inc. stole that startup from me, along with all its revenue, and shut it down.

 

[Future Sensors]

Domain name protection/warranty/whatever

Lol.

 

[bmugford]

LOL yeah, that's a post from 2020, before the DNProtect website was even fully launched and someone could actually purchase something on it. I was linking out to DNProtect pretty heavily back then and getting links to the site.

There is ample evidence that the term "insurance" was actually used in commerce, and when it was not used other synonyms were used, clearly to avoid potential regulatory issues.

Either way, those were the findings by the Washington OIC and Epik agreed to the settlement. I think they got off very light with the $10K fine.

Brad

 

[bhartzer]

There is ample evidence that the term "insurance" was actually used in commerce, and when it was not used other synonyms were used, clearly to avoid potential regulatory issues.

Either way, those were the findings by the Washington OIC and Epik agreed to the settlement. I think they got off very light with the $10K fine.

Brad

I agree, Epik Inc., Epik Holdings, Inc., DNProtect, "CEO of DNProtect" Brian Royce, and Rob Monster got off very light on that one. I wasn't a part of it when they settled.

 

[bmugford]

DNProtect as a company was profitable, and I co-founded it with Rob Monster. Epik, Inc. stole that startup from me, along with all its revenue, and shut it down.

I am still confused how Brian Royce signed the settlement, from a position that doesn't even exist.
DNProtect CEO.

If the partnership was between you and @Rob Monster personally, Brian should have no role in anything. He was certainly not CEO of DNProtect.

 

[Future Sensors]

I agree, Epik Inc., Epik Holdings, Inc., DNProtect, "CEO of DNProtect" Brian Royce, and Rob Monster got off very light on that one. I wasn't a part of it when they settled.

Fortunately, you had your Epik.com Staff badge removed in time.

 

[bhartzer]

I am still confused how Brian Royce signed the settlement, from a position that doesn't even exist.
DNProtect CEO.

If the partnership was between you and @Rob Monster personally, Brian should have no role in anything. He was certainly not CEO of DNProtect.

Show attachment 236402

Brian Royce was never EVER involved with DNProtect, and he never ever was CEO of DNProtect.

 

[bhartzer]

Fortunately, you had your Epik.com Staff badge removed in time.

That actually was never correct at any time, I was never Epik.com staff. That was a mistake, I never requested that NamePros give me that badge.